Introduction

China's recent 60th Anniversary
National Military Parade produced a number of interesting disclosures,
including the first public viewing of the complete components of the HQ-9/FD-2000
and HQ-12/KS-1A
SAM system batteries. While the HT-233 and H-200
phased array engagement radars have been well exposed previously, the
parade did
yield plentiful high resolution imagery providing a more accurate
perspective on these important systems.

Much more interesting, however, was the first public exposure of three
new self-propelled battery acquisition radars associated with these
systems, the Type 120, Type 305A and the Type 305B. While two
are derivatives or variants of existing acquisition radars, one is
entirely new and
hitherto unknown to Western analysts.

Another important observation is that all of the components of the HQ-9
and HQ-12 SAM systems are designed from the outset for hide, shoot and scoot operations,
to maximise opportunities to evade SEAD/DEAD tasked aircraft. This is
an important advance for the PLA IADS, which even a decade ago relied
primarily on the static HQ-2 Guideline system, typically operated from
fixed semi-hardened SAM sites. With the PLA IADS now replacing HQ-2
batteries with a mix of HQ-9, S-300PMU/PMU1/PMU2 and HQ-12, the SAM
force has wholly transitioned to systems with excellent, if not
exceptional mobility, by contemporary standards.

While the HQ-12 TEL has been displayed frequently in public, the HQ-9
TEL has until recently been known only from poor quality Chinese media
imagery. High quality imagery shows a design closely modelled on the
Russian S-300PM/PMU 5P85SU/SE TEL design, hosted on the Taian TAS-5380
8 x
8
chassis, itself a derivative of the MAZ-543 Uragan/Kashalot. An
important difference is the absence of an automatically deployed and
stowed telescoping radio datalink
mast, requiring a two man crew to deploy or stow the TEL datalink mast.
For rapid hide, shoot and scoot
operations
this will impact the repeatability of stow and deploy times.

Sources in Asia claim that HQ-9 battery components can be networked
using fixed optical fibre cables, microwave directional line of sight
links, or other RF datalinking channels1.
However, until HQ-9 TELs and
HT-233 engagement radars are equipped with organic telescoping or
folding RF datalink antenna/mast systems, the full mobility of the
basic self-propelled configurations employed will not be exploited.
Retrofit of such technology, given the availability of extant Russian
terminal hardware on 30N6E Tombstone and 5P85TE TELs, is not a
challenging task in reverse engineering.

Deployed HQ-9 battery.
Above,
self propelled YLC-2V to the left with its three support vehicles, in
the background a HT-233 battery engagement radar. All vehicles employ
the “classic” rather than more recent “pixelated” camouflage patterns
(via
Chinese Internet).

Cited HQ-9 battery composition is 6 four round TELs linked to a HT-233
engagement radar, under the control of a TWS-312 battery command post.
Typically four batteries are supported by single acquisition radar,
variants of the YLC-2V being most commonly cited, and observed in
published imagery.

A similar arrangement is likely for the HQ-12 system, with 6 two round
TELs clustered around the H-200 engagement radar to form a single
battery. To date there have been no specific disclosures on what
acquisition radars are employed with the HQ-12, but there are no good
reasons to assume that HQ-12 batteries are not supported by the same
acquisition radar package used with the HQ-9.

Not unlike the HQ-9 batteries proper, the three new
acquisition radars displayed are built for true hide,
shoot and scoot operations, with hydraulically deployed
supports, and hydraulically powered antenna deployment.

All three radars are carried on the ND1260, a 6 x 6 military variant of
the North-Benz / Inner Mongolia First Machinery Group Corporation 2629
series 15 tonne payload truck, which is a legally licenced derivative
of the
German designed short cabin Mercedes-Benz
“New
Generation”
NG
80 series2.
These
truck
chassis
are
available
with
either
liquid or air cooled diesel
powerplants.

The 6 x 6 ND1260 series will not provide the off-road mobility of the
HQ-9/FD-2000 chassis, which is based on the Taian TA-5380 series,
built by the Taian Special Vehicle Co., Ltd. It is interesting that the
PLA did not opt to install these radars on the heavier 8 x 8 North-Benz NG 80 military
chassis variants, which have better cross country capabilities, and
have been used in other PLA military applications.

Technical analysis of each of these five radar types follows under
individual entries.

Engagement Radars

HT-233 HQ-9 Self Propelled Engagement Radar

The HT-233 engagement radar has
always been regarded to be a derivative of the Russian 30N6E Flap Lid /
Tomb Stone series, sharing most of the basic technology in this design.
Until this year, available imagery was of very poor quality, and showed
a range of configurations carried on 8 x 8 and 10
x 10 variants of the Taian TAS-5380 series chassis.

Production HT-233 systems are being supplied on the 10 x 10 Taian
TAS5501, a 30 tonne payload class variant of the TAS5380 vehicle,
making it the heaviest derivative of the 30N6E. This feature makes the
HT-233 easily identifiable with optical or high resolution imaging
radar ISR, against the baseline Russian systems.

While the heavier chassis may reflect volumetric and weight issues
earlier in the design of the radar, it also provides for long term
growth in processing capability and power rating, as more recent
technology will be more compact and dissipate less.

The octagonal or truncated square passive phased array is claimed to
employ 4,000 phase shifter elements. Unlike the 30N6E, the array shape
is
easily resolved due to the absence of the rectangular dielectric
external cover used on the Russian radar. The HT-233 carries an IFF/SSR
array antenna installed at the top of the primary antenna frame
structure, which is structurally extended. The space feed design
appears indistinguishable from the 30N6E1 design, including the
mechanical arms used to deploy the feed assembly.

Recently cited capabilities
include a 300 MHz instantaneous bandwidth in the lower X-Band or
C-Band, a detection/track range of 150/100 km for unspecified target
RCS, a field of regard in azimuth of 360°, and elevation beamsteering
from 0° to 65°. It is claimed to be capable of concurrently tracking
more than 50 targets. The radar provides target acquisition and
tracking within its coverage sector, post launch missile capture,
midcourse missile tracking and command link guidance. Sources disagree
on whether the radar provides terminal phase illumination for TVM
endgame guidance like the 30N6E series, as the HQ-9 missile round has
been also claimed to employ active terminal homing. As the basic
missile round relied heavily upon the technology in the late model 5V55
and early model 48N6E missiles, the latter claim may be speculative.

An interesting claim by Sengupta is that the HT-233 employs “randomness in frequency, space and time”;
if this claim is correct then the HT-233 would be a
frequency hopper, employing pseudo-random angular scan algorithms. The
latter may qualify the design as having a basic LPI capability, with
the caveat that the 300 MHz bandwidth severely constrains achievable
LPI effect1.

The HT-233 should not be underestimated, as it retains the best antenna
design features seen in the 30N6E series, but is likely to evolve
unique waveforms, signal and data processing, and modes as the PLA
further refines this design over time. The evolution of the J-11B from
the Su-27SK presents the case study.

Stills
captured from a January, 2010, CCTV7 broadcast discussing the HQ-9 SAM
system in operation, show a number of operator consoles in vans used
with the system. Notable is the use of state-of-the-art AMCLD COTS
display technology, and modern software based synthetic displays and
mode selection. This is quite distinct from the CRT technology used in
Russian built S-300PMU/PMU1 battery components.

H-200 HQ-12/KS-1A Mobile Engagement Radar

The design background and
history of the H-200 Triumphant Mountain remains undocumented in the
West. While high quality imagery of the design has been available for
some years, until now images of the rear face of the space fed passive
array
antenna and the feed have not been available.

Imagery showing the HT-233 and H-200 parked together permits the simple
observation that the passive array in both radars appears identical in
size and geometry, suggesting that the array design used in both radars
may be the same, or closely related. The array structural frame is
however quite different, as is the antenna feed. Like the HT-233, the
H-200 mounts an IFF/SSR array across the top of the structural frame.

What has not been observed previously is the radar van used to tow the
H-200 antenna head trailer, carried on a 6 x 6 Taian TA5150A military
truck. While this van design has been photographed previously in
proximity to the H-200, there are still no indications of how many
vehicles are required for the complete system to deploy. At least two
different chassis have been used with the HQ-12 two round TEL, one
based on the 6 x 6 Taian TA5270A military truck, the other a 6 x 6
Hanyang Special Type
Vehicle Co., Ltd, military truck.

From a mobility perspective, the 20-30 minute stow/deploy times of the
HQ-12 are inferior to the HQ-9 and especially the Russian
S-300PMU/PMU1/PMU2, they are however much superior to the legacy HQ-2
variants the HQ-12 replaces. Rehosting the H-200 system on to a single
vehicle, like the HT-233, and providing mast mounted RF datalinks is
neither difficult nor unusually expensive. We should not be surprised
if future evolutions of this design follow the pattern of the HQ-9.

Acquisition
Radars

Type 120 /
K/LLQ120 Self
Propelled Low
Altitude Acquisition Radar

The Type 120 low altitude
acquisition radar was not disclosed prior to the 2009 parade. The
design appears to be an evolution of the JY-29/LSS-1 series, which
itself appears to be a derivative of the extant and widely marketed ECRIEE / CETC JY-11B/
Hunter-1 high mobility low altitude 3D acquisition radar. The Type
120 and JY-11B use an
identical 6 x 6 truck chassis, equipment cabin, hydraulic supports and
accessory housings. The Type 120 and LSS-1 share similar antenna and
mast designs, differing in details, but use different chassis and
cabins.

There are fundamental differences between the Type 120 and JY-11B
designs. The
hydraulically deployed mast design and its support structure are quite
different, with the Type 120 design mast base pivots further from the
aft of the vehicle, resulting in slightly lower elevation of the
antenna head when deployed. The Type 120 antenna mast and array are
much closer in configuration to the LSS-1 design.

While the dimensions of the planar array antennas appear identical, the
Type 120 has only 16 rows of elements, compared to 32 rows in the
S-band JY-11B antenna, at twice the spacing between rows. This
indicates operation in the L-band, like the LSS-1 radar, which also has
16 rows of elements. The Type 120 on display was not
equipped with an IFF/SSR array, although this function would likely be
embedded internally with the primary antenna employed for both channels.

A Chinese language PRC publication has described the Type 120 as having
“an antenna height of 2.3 metres
folded, and 7 metres unfolded, using a feed network of sixteen
230mm wave guides. It rotates at a maximum of ten revolutions per
minute, and operates in the L-band at a wavelength of 23.75 cm.”3

In the absence of detailed published specifications for the radar, and
detail on
peak power ratings, any performance estimates would be necessarily
speculative at this time. It is likely that frequency scanning is used
for heightfinding, as in the JY-11B, although some Chinese sources
claim the Type 120 lacks heightfinding capability, which is consistent
with the LSS-1 design.

Operationally, the Type 120 performs a similar role to the Russian 76N6E Clam Shell series, the latter
typically deployed on a 40V6M
mast system. Other than fundamental differences in radar designs,
the Type 120 has much better mobility but inferior coverage footprint
in comparison with the Clam Shell system.

It is likely that a Type 120 would be colocated with a Type 305B, both
feeding target track data to the Command Post controlling a cluster of
HQ-9 and/or HQ-12 batteries. The Type 120 would provide frequency
diversity, and extend radar horizon coverage for low flying targets
such as terrain following aircraft and cruise missiles.

The new Type 305A 3D acquisition
radar is unique and does not resemble any known Chinese radar designs.
It is carried on the same Mercedes-Benz NG 80 derived chassis as
the Type 120 and Type 305B radars.

The antenna design physically resembles existing Western S-band AESAs
such as the Thales Ground Master
series, or the very much larger Israeli IAI/Elta EL/M-2080
Green Pine ABM radar series. The depth of the primary antenna and
its
structural frame is typical for AESA designs in this category, using a
stacked modular feed network arrangement; this is well documented in a
number of Russian AESA designs.

The rear face of the antenna frame is largely occupied with voluminous
equipment housings, of similar depth to the antenna frame itself, and
of equal height. These would be consistent with the installation of low
voltage AESA power supplies, cooling equipment, receiver, and exciter
hardware. China's industry has previously designed and built large
AESAs, specifically for the KJ-200 and KJ-2000 AWACS projects,
operating either in the L-Band or S-Band, so the basic technology is
available to construct a ground based radar in this category.

Chinese sources have identified the radar as a long range 3D high
altitude acquisition and search design, intended to support missile
guidance applications. This type of functionality is consistent with a
number of extant dual role acquisition radars, built to support long
range acquisition of aerial targets at medium to high altitudes,
and acquisition of Tactical Ballistic Missile (TBM) category targets.

In recent years claims have emerged of an intended ABM or ATBM role for
the HQ-9, but no evidence of a suitable acquisition radar for this
purpose was ever provided. If the Type 305A is what it appears to
be, then it would be the kind of radar required for a ATBM acquisition
capability.

Until further disclosures are made, deeper analysis of the Type 305A
would be largely speculative.

Type 305B /
K/LLQ305B Self
Propelled 3D
Acquisition Radar

Type 305B systems with
antennas
deployed (via Chinese Internet).

The Type 305B 3D acquisition
radar appears to be a variant of the existing NRIET / CEIEC / CETC
YLC-2V, which has been photographed as part of a HQ-9 battery, and
has been reported as employed to support up to four HT-233 engagement
radars, each with four TELs. Chinese sources describe this radar as
optimised for search and acquisition of aerial targets.

The principal distinction between the established YLC-2V and the Type
305B would appear to be the absence of the IFF/SSR array mounted across
the top of the antenna.

A Chinese language PRC publication has described the Type 305B as
a “ three dimensional radar which
has an antenna height of 3.5 metres, and employs sixty 350 mm
waveguide feeds. It operates in the S-band at a wavelength of 11.67 cm.”3

The YLC-2V employs a single 6 x 6 truck carrying the antenna head and
turntable, which is hydraulically deployed, and three additional 6 x 6
trucks carrying cabins for electronics and operator stations. None of
the latter were displayed with the Type 305B antenna systems.

The hydraulically folded antenna used with the Type 305B has 58 element
rows and will employ frequency scanning like other radars in this
family of designs. Row spacing suggests S-band operation, like the
YLC-2V.